Flint Water Crisis Exchanges between Rep. Chaffetz & EPA Administrator McCarthy (C-SPAN)

the C-SPAN networks bring you long form public affairs programming from the nation's capital and are a public service of your television provider cpan created by cable I'll now recognize myself for for five minutes um Governor you've apologized correct correct have there have been people that have been fired correct anybody also dismissed or otherwise retired yes um did the state of Michigan do something wrong yes administrator McCarthy the EPA do in your mind did the EPA do anything wrong I don't know whether we did everything right that's the challenge that I'm facing now that the challenge you're facing right now is my question and the my question is did the EPA do anything wrong I think we could have been I I would would hope that we would have been more aggressive I would hope that we would have escalated this issue if we could have done absolutely anything to stand on a rooftop and scream about the challenges we're having in you're just not here here's the fundamental difference first of all we have jurisdiction here in Congress on the EPA I don't have jurisdiction on the governor I don't have jurisdiction on I have jurisdiction to call him up here and Republicans did call him up here he volunteered to be here and we are investigating this is our third hearing on this topic but here's the fundamental difference and I and I hope you and I hope everybody understands this I see responsibility I see people that are getting fired I see changes I see an admission that there was fundamental wrong that happened in the organization but then when I turn to the EPA has anybody been fired that's a question no sir has anybody been dismissed no sir when the EPA Region 5 administrator that uh Susan Hedman the day you finally did take decisive action when you were questioned about that you said that her act of stepping down was courageous I did I'm going to ask you again did the EPA do anything wrong the EPA worked very hard let me make one okay no let no no because I have another question for you no hold on okay did the uh Mark Edwards has testified here twice he doesn't have a dog in this fight other than he wants good quality health for people and he wants good clean water and he happens to know the science behind the water on those two hearings did did Mr Edwards say anything that you think was wrong or maybe I you don't or inaccurate do you think Mr Edwards said anything that was inaccurate or wrong in those two testimonies I I think he was not at all informed about what EP PA did I think he knows nothing about the law which he readily admits he doesn't know how we're supposed to work in the system he doesn't understand that the problem itself was the responsibility of the states oversight was our responsibility we took that seriously and we conducted it does that mean I don't have regrets because I'd really like that's a whole different standard everybody's can say that's that's cheap oh yeah we just got regrets that no that's a cheap that's cheap well so you have to look at how the law works and we did yeah you know what and it failed it you failed you have you said quote if there is any any uh anything I could do if there was a any switch I could pull you had that under the law and you didn't do it no sir I did not have that under the law yes you did if there is an imminent threat if there is an imminent threat you can pull that switch and you finally did in January administrator you are wrong there's a two parts to that sir you skip the second what's the second you need to have the information to determine an imminent substantial so why do we even need an EPA if you can't do that you were in those homes I am asking the questions okay in Fe yes okay in February is when you first arrived on the scene and it wasn't until January of the next year that you actually did something that's the fundamental problem don't look around like you're mystified that's what happened Miguel Del tles showed up in February you didn't take action you didn't and you could have pulled that switch consistently took AC action from that point forward consist there are a lot of people in this audience from Flint nobody believes that you took action you had those levers there Mark Edwards from Virginia Tech bless his heart no just listen for a second had the opportunity they have said things like we failed to get EPA to take lead and water risk seriously it's possible be another quote of his and this is possible because the EPA had a has effectively condone cheating on the lead and copper rule monitoring since 2006 he read your OP ED that you put out that was one of the most offensive things I could possibly imagine and he says about you uh EPA administrator Gena McCarthy that effectively absolved EPA of any wrongdoing or any role in creating the Flint de disaster if you want to do the courageous thing like you said Susan Hedman did then you too should resign nobody's going to believe that you have the opportunity you had the the the presence you had the authority you had the backing of the federal government and you did not act when you had the chance and if you're going to do the courageous thing you too should step down my time has exped I will not close this hearing until Mr Cummings has uh equal time to as well uh but let me go to administrator McCarthy um the leaden copper rule requires You by law to update it every six years but you did not do that correct it actually requires us to review it every six years to see if it needs you don't believe that it's required by under law to actually update it there are many laws that you're just supposed to look at it no sir we were actively looking at this we are actively looking at this rule it is very challenging if you want to do a substantive revision to it if you want to do what the last Administration did just tweak it a bit it doesn't don't blame the Bush Administration you've been they've been in office for more than seven years now so um you said in your own words that you were going to have this new rule out in 2013 correct I'm really not aware of that sir I I know that the schedule that i' I'm aware of is is a 2017 schedule you mean the 2018 is what we heard testimony well the draft would be out in 2017 that's that's what I'm aware this is this is what's so frustrating you have somebody like an expert like Mark Edwards come and tell us there's so many ways around this and there's so much confusion do you believe there's any confusion about the lead and copper rule uh I do believe that it can be strengthened and I do believe no no no that's you asked strengthened I'm asking if you think there's any any confusion well it it it's I believe there probably is confusion I I I I'm not the one on the receiving end of it but we work to clarify that whenever anyone you're the administrator what do you mean you're not on the receiving well I meant because we manage the program the states do the implementation and they do the the enforcement and in this case we were very clear to them what their responsibility was under the existing law so while I understand we should strengthen the law I agree we had what we needed in place to prevent this from happening really but then why did it happen because the state didn't Implement and enforce appropriately so you sent Miguel Del Toro in February 2015 out to go uh do the testing that wasn't for a lead and copper rule testing that was a testing for an individual in their home which ended up being three houses where there was a localized problem I did not have information until July 21st that there was a systemic problem with that system yet as soon as we knew there was any problem in three houses we told them to start doing no you didn't proper treatment s we did but the timeline is such that Miguel Del Toro goes does the testing yes the report gets leaked which he feels he was reprimanded for that it gets re least the mayor calls the EPA Susan Hedman and says is this report true should I be worried the answer is no you have nothing to worry about and the mayor went on television we played it before this committee and says it's safe to drink the water sir I think I've I tried to explain that Susan did not dismiss the substance of the report she indicated that it was interim the data hadn't been quality controlled and it wasn't leaked it was actually sent out it was in the newspapers that I know I know it was in the newspaper and the ACL was pushing on it and the person's home that she came to it was out there and when why why do the testing if you're just going to Simply blame the state I mean there is no doubt and the governors admitted that the people and the information that were happening from the career bureaucrats at the Department of Environmental equality got it wrong but let me read to you this this is uh you said they did everything that you immediately wanted to have everything done on on the corrosion control correct I said in on by starting April 24th we when we realized that they were not doing corrosion control we told them under the current law they should do it okay well I'm going to enter into the record a email who's uh Jennifer krooks she is one of our staff people um uh uh managers in the water program in the region is she competent as far as I know I don't know her personally okay well on July 1st she sends and there are a lot of DEQ Personnel on here and I'm going to read part of what she says you just said that they that you told them to introduce the corrosion control in April this is what she wrote to the Department of Environmental Quality the idea to ask Flint to Simply add phosphate may be premature there are many other issues and factors that must be taken into account which would require a comprehensive look at the water quality and the system before any treatment recommendations can and should be made let me then let me explain that if you wouldn't mind because that actual advice came from Miguel because when I say you need to do treatment it does not mean that I have a switch to turn on he indicated that the agency didn't have the full water quality data that's when we demanded and offered and begged to be on their technical advisory you were this was a conference it was a summary of the conference called between DEQ and the EPA no there was a flint technical uh advisory committee I'm sorry look the public can look at this for themselves well without okay but but it was not as easy as flipping a switch it did not mean that didn't they didn't need to require to do it the question was whether we were going to be premature in how best to get that done what you did is you came here and you blamed solely the state and I'm here to tell you the state has a big part of this blame I'm not trying to excuse them whatsoever but you're trying to excuse everything from the EPA saying you told them to put phosphates in the water and they didn't sir I'm not trying the doc wait till I'm done asking you the question the documentation says that you actually had a conference call from the EPA telling the EQ to not do it yet no we were telling them that that that they had to do corrosion control the method and treatment depended on Experts to tell them how to do it we offered that consistently from March on and they actually never even took us up on it till September that's not true well I'm going into the record we entered this before November 3rd who is Peter graat he is the uh the manager of drinking water office and headquarters yeah he's he's the Washington DC expert here's what he wrote okay this is November 3rd it appears it appears there are different possible interpretations of the Leen copper rule copper rule with respect to how the rules optimal optimal corrosion control treatment procedures apply to this situation which may have a led to some uncertainty with respect to the Flint weter system so here you have a city who's begging for help they know they're in trouble okay they're asking for that help and I've got email after email from the Environmental Protection Agency saying you know what maybe you should hold off because we're not sure maybe there is confusion under letting copper rule maybe we are supposed to do six months of testing I'm not excusing them at all but you need to take some responsibility cuz you screwed up and you messed up a 100,000 people's lives a 100,000 of them 10,000 of those people are 6 years old and younger and you take no responsibility you don't think you did anything wrong right you don't think there's anybody did anything wrong I already indicated that we could have worked more aggressively I wish we had can I explain the the memo would you like me to I want you to have an appreciation and an understanding of why the DEQ people are confused by the direction from the envir Department of Environmental from from the EPA there was no confusing signal sent from the agenc what were they supposed to of time should they have put the phosphates in the water yes or no not dumping it in without connecting with the experts and they did not have the expert voice at the table CU they refused to let us to the table they were at the table that comes from the EPA starts the email that is not the task force we're talking about to provide technical expertise okay let's go through the list uh Leanne Smith Richard benzy Chris Phillip Carrie monosmith Dana uh I'm going to pronounce I'm going to mispronounce their last name going through this I don't know those individuals so yeah they all work for you and the EPA work for this here's what it says here's what it says I'm sorry DEQ but from the EPA thank you governor governor knows who works for him uh here's it below are my draft notes from our call last week thank you all for participating I apologize first apology i' had seen for the delay in getting out this draft for you to all review and it says don't simply add the phosphates can you all I want you to acknowledge is that there's there should be some it could have created more damage than it cured exact water systems are and deserve technical experts which they did not have available we did they wouldn't let them at the table they were at the table they were in the same conversation table that is that is a a semiannual call we have with the Department where we share information if you look through the record we consistently said we have National experts we want to help we had work behind the scenes to figure out how we could do that we just never got invited nor will we accept it at the table at that point yeah I'm going to go through my last point and then we'll get to to Mr Clay here you said you didn't have the authority to do I want to read to you part of the law here okay this is section 1431 Part D part D section 1431 of the emergency Powers within the Safe Drinking Water Act it says the ad administrator that would be you yes upon receipt of information that a contaminant which is present in or likely to enter a public water system and I'm skipping ahead because it qualifies for terrorist attacks and all those types of things which may present an imminent and substantial endangerment to the health of persons and that appropriate state and local authorities have not acted to protect the health of such persons may take such a actions as he may deem necessary in order to protect the health of such persons so if they weren't doing what you wanted them to do why didn't you take action earlier surpris Mr chairman the second part is about State's rights and what we have to do what do you mean the second part there is a twart process to us actually issuing a 1431 the second is we need to make sure that the states aren't already taking appropriate action that's what's so infuriating when did you know that they didn't do it we knew July 21st that there was a systemic problem the state agreed the next day and then all they did was slow walk it that's why we had to to do it the way we did I I wished we had gone further I wish we had gone farther I wish we had yelled from the Treetops but there is no way that my agency created this problem or there was ambiguity in the existing law that wouldn't have done the same thing that the governor said which was let them know to use your common sense don't put people at risk just because we couldn't figure out that in the life of us in our guidance we never thought thought that anybody would go from a treated system to an untreated system and not treat it I didn't think we ever had to say that because I never thought anyone would that's where we are today you can't have it both ways you can't have people on the ground testing it people like Miguel Del Toro doing those types of tests sending up the warning flags no sending up the warning flags and then not I'm G well past my time well recognize the gentleman from Missouri thank you thank

Channel: C-SPAN

Views: 168,426

Keywords: YouTube Editor

Id: LCSXAr49vMw

Length: 17min 26sec (1046 seconds)

Published: Thu Mar 17 2016